应用一次性包皮环切缝合器与传统包皮环切术的临床对比研究  

Comparative study on the application of disposable circumcision suture device and conventional circumcision

作　　者：张溪[1] 侯垒[1] 崔功静 高玉杰[1] ZHANG Xi HOU Lei CUI Gongfing GAO Yujie.(Department of Urology, Beijing Aerospace General Hospital, Beijing 100076, China)

机构地区：[1]北京航天总医院泌尿外科,北京100076

出　　处：《中国性科学》2016年第12期31-34,共4页Chinese Journal of Human Sexuality

摘　　要：目的:对比应用一次性包皮环切缝合器的包皮环切缝合术与传统包皮环切术治疗包皮过长或包茎的临床疗效。方法:回顾性分析我院泌尿外科采用包皮环切缝合术(n=140)和传统包皮环切术(n=110)治疗包皮过长或包茎250例患者临床资料,比较两种术式的手术时间、术中出血量、术后1h视觉模拟疼痛评分、伤口愈合时间、外观满意度及术后并发症。结果:包皮环切缝合术在手术时间、术中出血量、术后1h视觉模拟疼痛评分及外观满意度上明显优于传统包皮环切术(P<0.05),两者在伤口愈合时间及术后并发症上差别无统计学意义(P>0.05)。在术后并发症分类上,包皮环切缝合术组的术后水肿发生率低于传统包皮环切术组(P<0.05),前者的术后出血、术后感染及术后裂开发生率与后者无明显差异(P>0.05)。结论:包皮环切缝合术操作简单方便、手术时间短、出血少、术后疼痛轻,同时外观满意度高,对于包皮过长或包茎可作为首选术式。Objectives： To compare the clinical effects of conventional circumcision and disposable circumcision suture device（ DCSD） in the treatment of redundant prepuce and phimosis. Methods： Clinical data of 250 patients with redundant prepuce or phimosis,of which 140 were treated by DCSD and 110 were treated by conventional circumcision,were reviewed. The operation time,intraoperative blood loss,1- hour postoperative visual analogue scores,incision healing time,degrees of patients＇ satisfaction with penile appearance and postoperative complications were compared. Results： As for the operation time,intraoperative blood loss,1- hour postoperative visual analogue scores and degrees of patients＇ satisfaction with penile appearance,DCSD group was significantly better than conventional circumcision group（ P〈0. 05）. And there was no significant difference in incision healing time and postoperative complications. Conclusion： Compared with conventional circumcision,DCSD is with short operation time,few blood loss,satisfied postoperative appearance of penile,less pain and less postoperative complications.

关 键 词：包皮环切术 包皮过长 包茎 

分 类 号：R699.8[医药卫生—泌尿科学]